WorkingPaper12
ChangingBordersinPublishedMigrationNarrativesinNorwegian
JohanSchimanski(UiTTheArcticUniversityofNorway/UniversityofOslo)
May2016
EUBORDERSCAPES (290775) is Funded by the European Commission under the 7th Framework Programme (FP7-SSH-2011-1), Area 4.2.1 The evolving concept of borders
EU BORDER Bordering, Political Landscapes and Social Arenas:Potentials and Challenges of Evolving Border
Concepts in a post-Cold War WorldSCAPES
2
2
ChangingBordersinPublishedMigrationNarrativesinNorwegian
JohanSchimanski
ABSTRACT
ThisworkingpapergivessomeoftheinterpretationsandworkinghypothesesreachedatthisstageofmycontributiontoresearchwithintheEUBORDERSCAPESprojectWorkingPackage10,ResearchTask 3: ”Cultural Borders of Europe ‘Bordering’ and ‘Re-bordering’ Europe through FictionalNarratives: TheCaseof Immigrant ‘Others’”. Thepaper examinesmigration literaturewrittenandpublished in Norwegian by the children of migrants or migrants born elsewhere but growing uppartlyinNorway,forrhetoricalandnarrativefigurationsofbordersandborder-crossingswhichcanprovide keys to changing conceptions of borders and to the values these are ascribed. Thepaperarguesforthecloseconnectionbetweenborderconceptsinthecorpusandthestatusofthebooksas performative acts crossing from private experience to public discourse. This process is oftenexplicitlyaddressedinthetextsthemselvesandispartofanextendedborderscape.Iintendlatertoaddressfurthertexts,thenegotiationofborderconceptsinthereceptionoftexts,thesocialcontextand research literature onmigration inNorway, and research literature onmigration literature ingeneral.
Keywords:migrationliterature,borderfigures,borderconcepts,borderscapes,publicsphere
Theglasswall
Earlyon inAmalAden’sbookMindrømom frihet: En selvbiografisk fortelling (2009, ”My
DreamofFreedom:AnAutobiographicalNarrative”),themaincharacterandnarratorseesa
glasswallinagovernmentofficeinOslo.ShehasjustarrivedinNorwayandhasbeentaken
by two other Somalis to register at the child welfare services, the concept of which is
incomprehensibletoher.”Wewalk inthroughadoor,andIseeawomansittingbehinda
glasswall,justliketheysatattheairport.”1Thisisthefirsttimeshemeetsandtalkswith–
oristalkedtoby–whiteNorwegians:”Wegointoasmallroomwiththewhiteladies.We
sitdownaroundatable,andnowtheyallspeakNorwegian.Idonotunderstandanything.
TheonlywordIrecognizeismyname”(38).
1MyowntranslationsfromtheNorwegiantexts,unlessotherwiseindicated.IhavenotincludedtheoriginalNorwegiantextsinthisworkingpaper.
3
3
What wemay recognize is the image of the glass wall or divider, manifesting a form of
border.Infeministdiscourse,ametaphoricalglassceilingallowswomenpursuingcareersto
imaginereachingfurtherinthehierarchy,butbarsthemfromactuallymovingupwards.In
thestory”Lafronteradecristal”(”TheCrystalFrontier”)byCarlosFuentes,partofthenovel
of the same name (Fuentes 1996, 187-213, trans. Fuentes 1999, 166-189), a male guest
worker from Mexico and a female office worker in New York have an encounter and
attempt to communicatewith each other, but any truemeeting is prevented by a highly
symbolic glass wall: she is standing inside the building, while he is washing its windows,
neitherabletoheartheother.InAden,infeministdiscourseandinFuentes,theglassdivide
formsaborderwitha specificepistemologicaldimension– theborder is transparentand
almost invisible–which simultaneously stands forapower relationshipand fora formof
exclusion. InAdenandFuentesat least, theglasswallalsosignifiesa lackof signification:
people communicate across the divide, but do not understand each other. Aden’s book
containswithinitanindictmentoftheNorwegianchildprotectionservicesasill-preparedto
dealwithyoungrefugeesfromotherculturesandlinguisticspheres.
InbothMindrømomfrihetandLafronteradecrystal,theglasswallactuallyexistsineither
anon-fictionalorfictionalworld,andisnotametaphor.Inbothcaseshowever,aswehave
seen,theglasswallisgivenasymbolicdimension,indicatingaformofpartialaccesswithout
trueparticipation.Thissymbolicdimensionisfurthermorestrengthenedbyametonymical
connectiontothenationalborder.Theimageoftheglasswall inAdenandinFuentesisa
version of the national border, topographically displaced in away typical of borders and
border figures, indicative of the way in which national borders form and are formed by
extended borderscapes (cf. Brambilla 2015, Rajaram and Grundy-Warr 2007, Schimanski
2015).InAden’stext,theimageoftheglasswallwouldhavehadlessweightinthisreading
ifithadnotbeenfortheaddedclauseintheabovequote,”justliketheysatattheairport”
(38). This is a reference toadescription,only a fewpagespreviously, ofAmal’s entrance
intoNorwayviaanairport:”Westandinaqueue,andHassantalksintheweird[merkelige]
languagewith a lady sitting behind a hatch” (35). The border toNorway, itself displaced
topographically from the outer edges of the nation to an international airport near the
capitalcity,isrepeatedonasymboliclevelasadifferenceofculturewhichAmalwillmeet
continually throughout her life in Norway. This symbolic border is given topographical
4
4
materiality throughan architectural detail, itself a topographical borderon amicro scale,
whichthusallowedtofunctionasaborderfigure.
Sea,war,back,tunnel
A ”border figure” (Schimanski 2006, 58-60) is an imagewhich stands for the border and
which gives it a specific form, different from other border figures, bringing with it
sometimesthesamebutalsootherconnotations,alsodependentonthecontext inwhich
theborder figure is read (”figure”here refers to rhetorical figures, rather than topeople,
through of course a person can also be a border figure in the sense used here). Border
figurescanbestrikingimagessuchastheglasswalloraswewillsee,anopensea,awar,a
turnedbackoradark tunnel.Theycanhoweveralsobemorecomplicatedconfigurations
(or ”con-figurations”) of time and space as produced in narratives of border-crossing or
borderlandlife.
In Min drøm om frihet, ”My life in freedom”, ”freedom” (frihet) must be understood
ironicallytoalargeextent,asAmalissuccessivelysubjectedtolifeasachildsoldieroutside
Mogadishu,aspolicedbySomalicommunitiesinOslo.Thefreedomsheattainsattheendof
the narrative is contingent on being brought into a police protection scheme in order to
protectherfromthosecommunities.However,almostexactlyatthemiddleofthenovel(on
page92oftheinall178pagesofthemainnarrative),thereisanarrativeturnorreversal.
Frombeingcaughtinadownwardspiralintoviolentbehaviousanddrugabuse,Amalgoes
to beginning upward integration into Norwegian society. This halfway point, marked by
Amal’s meeting the woman who is to become her first Norwegian friend, constitutes a
narrativeborder in thebook’s text,dividing the firsthalf fromthesecond,andcoinciding
withthethebreakbetweentwochapters.Inabookwhichisotherwisenotableforitsstark
and direct prose, it is notable that this cultural border crossing is directly preceded by a
passage in which the text itself crosses over into the language of metaphor (following
FrancoMoretti’sthesisthat”figuralitygoesup”attheborder,Moretti1998,45):
IfeelasifIamswimminginthemiddleofthesea,butdonotknowwhichdirectionit
isrighttoswimsoastoreachland.Iamconfusedanddesperate.Isleepalotduring
5
5
theday andoftenendup in fights at night. I am scared, here is also awar. I feel
unsafewhereverIam.Ifeelthatthepastishuntingme.Ifeelalone.Ifeelthatthe
world has turned its back tome. I am lost for ever because I cannot stop getting
high.Gettinghigh isamonsterwhich lives insideme, I cannot livewithoutgetting
high.Iambecomingmoreandmoreviolent,thereisnobodytheretohelpme,Iam
alonewithmyproblems.Thelong,darktunnelwhichismylifeisstilldark,thereis
nolightandnofuture.(Aden2009,92)
Thepassage fromalienation to integration is a cultural border-crossingwhich follows the
topographicalpassage fromSomalia toNorway.Theborder is crossedagainandagain,at
various points in time and in the text. The quoted paragraph contains a string of border
figuresthatattributedifferentvaluestothecentralborder-crossingofthenovel,justasthe
glasswalldoes.Swimmingwithnosenseofdirectioninopen”sea”,butwithhopeofland,
points to the disorienting effect of border-crossing, in which the border becomes an
uncanny,unsafezonewithnosuretyofsucessinitscrossing.Theperceivedconflictlinesof
”war”inOsloindicatethewayinwhichtheinternalstrifeinSomaliacrossestheborderto
NorwaywithAmal.Alienationcausedbyborder-crossingandfailedpromisesofintegration
isa”back”turned;abarrierisformedandthesubjectismadeinvisibleastheother’sgaze
turnsaway,dis-recognizingtheself.Theextendedborder-crossingbecomesa”darktunnel”
ofcontinual,constrictingnegativity.Throughthesefigures,thebookpresentsmigrationfor
thechildsoldierrefugeeasanover-extendedborderzone.
Thenarrativeborderconfigurationof theplot’s turningpromisesanpartialending to this
zone, ”freedom” taken in a non-ironic sense. The Norwegian neighbour she meets in a
supermarket who is to become her friend has been given the alias ”Liv”, a Norwegian
woman’snamebutalsothenounliv,meaning”life”,whichthusrepeats1)thelastsentence
of paragraph quoted above, and 2) the very last word of the following short paragraph
whichendsthechapterbeforetheturntakesplace:”Iwantabetterlife”(29).
6
6
Publishedimmigranttales
In this study, I examine published texts by immigrants (or the children of immigrants)
relatingtodiasporacommunitiesinNorway,askinghowtheirimagesandstoriesofborders
andbordercrossingscontributetoshiftsinourconceptsofborders.
Why look at published narratives? In literary studies, this question is not often asked.
Literary texts are mostly assumed to have been published. In social studies however,
narrativesareoftenseenaswhatourlivesandidentitiesaremadeof,togetherconstituting
alargesetofnarrativesofwhichtheoverwhelmingmajorityarenotpublished.Indeed,the
social scientist may even hold a prejudice against published narratives, seeing them as
removed from the real thing, subject to the vagaries of markets, publishers and state
subsidies. Even worse, many published narratives are in fact fictions and fantasies, and
scarcelyreliableasobjectivesources.
In the following I suggest however that published narratives provide essential keys to
understandingthepublicsocial imaginarywhich isan importantelement inapoliticaland
democratic society. Theyare in themselvesperformativeactsofborder crossingbetween
the private and the public, making the private visible. Seen in this way, the difference
betweendocumentationandfictionisoflessimportance,thoughitalsooftenhasaneffect
onhowpublishednarrativesbecomepartofthesocialimaginary.Withinthepublicsphere,
literatureoverlapswithotherpublicdiscourses,evenwhen itdescribesprivate, individual
experiences.
Norway has a developed culture of public debate in which literature often has played a
majorrole,followingtheinternationallyfamiliarmodelofIbsen’splays,forexample.While
theautonomyofliteraturehasbeenmuchdebatedinNorwegianliterarystudies,asithas
elsewhere, it is clear that Norwegian literature caters for the desire of readers to follow
publicdebates.LookingspecificallyatimmigrationliteratureinNorwegian,Iproposeinthe
formofhypothesisthatthesecaternotonlyadesirefor1)aestheticexperience,butalsofor
2)ethnographic informationabout immigrants’ lives,3)politicalknowledgeaboutongoing
publicdebates,andinsomecases4)therapeuticidentificationonthepartsofreaderswho
7
7
stemfromdiasporicculturesorfeelmarginalizedinotherways.Thelackofanaestheticized,
postmodernisttraditionofdiasporaliteraturesimilartothatwhichistobefoundinEnglish,
French, Swedish, German, etc. may indicate that these desires in the Norwegian public
spherehavearelativelyequalweight.
Theembeddingofpublicdebateinliteratureworksbothways:ontheonehand,literatureis
givenaroleinpublicdebate,ontheother,literaturebecomesmoredifficulttodifferentiate
fromotherkindsofpublishednarrative.Methodologically,thismeansthatanyapproachto
diasporic literature, a form of literaturewhich addresses highlymediatized public issues,
musttakeintoaccountawidespectrumofgenres,rangingfromthepurelydocumentaryto
theheavilyliterary,fictionalandfigural.Thisspectrumisborneoutbytheextensiverange
of published immigration narratives available in Norwegian, including novels,
autobiographies, fictionalized
autobiographies (sometimes
written pseudonymously),
anonymized interview-based
biographies written in the 3rd
person (Eskild 2010), along with
anthologiesof letters fromchildren
(Kumar 1997), interview-based narratives (Aden 2011), short stories, and narratives
resulting from oral narratives projects (Johansen and Vedeld 2008) and autobiography
projects (Danielsen 2005). Some of these narratives are produced by diaspora “authors”,
othersbydiaspora “public intellectuals”, stillmorebyNorwegian“researchers” (my scare
quotesindicatethestatusofsuchlabelsasdiscursivelyproducedsubjectpositions).
Typically, in public and also academic discourse, diasporas are divided up into
generations:“1stgeneration”and“2ndgeneration”(borninNorway)immigrants.Recently,
mentionhasbeenmadeof“generation1½”immigrants,withreferencetochildrenbornin
othercountries,butbroughtupinNorway,butalsoinaformofironicdiscourseanalysisof
the“generation”rhetoricwhichemphasizesafeelingofhybridityand“halfness’.Ingivingan
overviewofdiaspora literature inNorwegian, it isdifficulttoavoidasimilar ’generational’
logic.OnecanforexamplespeakofKhalidHussain’spioneeringnovelPakkis(1986,”Paki”),
a novel of urban youth caught between Oslo street and Pakistani family cultures, as
PHASE0 generation1noauthors
noaccesstoNorwegianliteraryculture
PHASE1KhalidHussainPakkis(“Paki”)1986
"father"ofmodernimmigrantnovelinNorwegian
PHASE2generation1½,generation2authors
accesstoNorwegianliteraryCulture
8
8
constituting in itself the “phase 1” of diaspora literature in Norwegian. This would be
precededbya“phase0”:theoriginalimmigrantswholackaccesstotheNorwegianliterary
and public spheres and thus lack a public voice. It would be followed by a “phase 2” of
books by writers who have grown up in Norway, in some cases being brought there as
children,inothersbeingbornthere.
I attempt here to differentiate between immigrant narratives, diasporic narratives and
“immigration narratives”. The Norwegian term immigrantlitteratur, seems often, like the
term“immigrant”,usedtocoverliteraturealsowrittenbypeopleborninNorway;thusthe
term “diasporic”may seemsmoreappropriate.However,my concernhere ismore todo
with narratives of “immigration”, whoever theymay be written by: i.e. narratives which
includestoriesoforiginalandsecondarybordercrossings.Thesearenotusuallywrittenby
adult immigrants to Norway, who have not been in a position to publish such writings.
Hussain’sbookalsodoesnotdirectlyconcerntheborder-crossingintoNorwaypresumably
made at one point by the protagonist’s family. Phase 2 authors and writers continually
figure border crossings both to and fromNorway, usually by airplane, in their narratives.
ThesebordercrossingsaremadebackandforthbetweenNorwayandcountriesofbirth(or
theirparents’births),orbetweenNorwayandothercountries(suchasEngland)connected
byglobaldiasporas.Veryoftenhowever,thesenarrativesalsotellthestoriesoftheoriginal
immigration toNorwaybyapreviousgeneration.As such, thesenarrativesprovidea rich
material for an investigation into literary and para-literary contributions to shifts in the
borderconcept.
Borderlinksandumbilicalborderobjects
Aden’sMin drøm om frihet, introduced above, and Roda Ahmed’s novel Forberedelsen
(2008, ”The Preparation”) are both published book-length narratives by authorswho are
partof theSomali diaspora inNorway. Through theiruseof genremay shed lighton the
different forms of publication involved, one being an pseudynomous fictionalized
autobiography (”Amal Aden” is a pseudonym), the other a novel – though both address
controversial questions of identity andmore concretely violence against women through
ritualgenitalmutilation.Somali immigrationnarrativesappearinallthegenresmentioned
9
9
earlier.AsinmanyotherEuropeancountries(thoughnot,forexampleintheUSA),Somali
immigrants, often refugees, have in Norway been seen as especially “problematic” and
“difficult” to integrate; Somalis have also grown to become one of the largest diasporic
communities in Norway. Public debates about migration have sometimes focused
specificallyonSomali immigration,andthismaygotoexplainingtowiderangeofgeneric
differentiationtobeseeninpublishednarrativesabouttheSomalidiasporainNorway.
Thetwotextsarebothbywomenandtellcoming-of-agestories,i.e.narrativesaboutyoung
peoplecrossingtemporalbordersbetweenchildhoodandadulthood.Bothareemphatically
narratives of liberation; their main plotlines are structured by extended epistemological
border crossings as their protagonists discover they are caught in both Somali and
Norwegian discourses. Captivity is a major motif, with both books ending in escape as
Ahmed’sprotagonisttakestheEurostartrainfromLondontoParisandAden’sprotagonist
entersthesecurityofNorwegianpoliceprotection.
The two texts however can be contrasted both in terms of plot and style. Ahmed’s
protagonist Zara is born in Norway and grows up in a privileged background with
professionalparents.ShefeelsfullyintegratedintoOslosocietyasachild,anditisonlyon
enteringpubertythatshediscoversachangeofrules.Theremaybeareferenceheretothe
“LoveLaws”ofArundhatiRoy’sbestsellingpostcolonialnovelTheGodofSmallThings(Roy
1997). Crossing North-North national borders from Oslo to the London Somali diasporic
community, Zara finds herself alienated and experiences a form of splitting and a
positioningina“thirdspace”.Aden’sunnamed(thoughautobiographical)protagonistgrows
upasawarorphanandchild soldier inandoutsideMogadishu, crossing theSouth-North
borderasayoungadult.Shefindsherselfinalifeofcrimeanddrugsontheoutskirtsofthe
Norwegian state and the Somali community in Oslo, and her narrative becomes one of
redemptionasshemakesajourneybothintowritingandintoprotection.
Both books are written in the first person. Ahmed’s book is strongly aestheticized,
combining the exingencies of the adolescent romance plotwith the postcolonial,magical
realiststyle familiartoreadersofmuchdiasporic literature inEnglish.Assuch,theauthor
utilizesthefragmentationofnarrativetime,playingwithmetaphors,fablesandotherforms
10
10
ofsymbolism,andbuildinganarrativeframearoundacollectionofphotosfromHargeisa,
whichtheprotagonistfindsinhergrandmother’shouseinLondon.Incontrast,Aden’sbook
is written so as to be as straight-forward and accessible as possible, and as spare as
everyday language in its use of metaphors. In a research interview carried out by the
present writer, Aden stated that she writes primarily in order to communicate. As its
subtitle”[e]nselvbiografiskfortelling”(”anautobiographicalnarrative”)indicates,thebook
isnotanovel,andtendstowardsthedocumentaryandtestimonial.Hermainfictionalturn
lies in her anonymization of herself and other characters through aliases and changes to
eventsandplaces.Thepossibilityofanonymityinpublicwritingbecomesherprotagonist’s
helperinprotectingherselfandherfriendsfrompossibleviolence.
Aden’sstarkproseandoftennightmarishplotgivesherbookaperhapsunintentedliterary
force. It alsomakes it possible to directly delineate the use ofmetaphor in the book, of
special interest when it comes to identifying its conceptions of the border. As described
already,thecrossingfromtheprosaic intothemetaphoric ismade,significantlyattextual
borders and in conjunction with borders crossings in the plot. Metaphors appear in her
foreword (7-9), where she describes the act of writing. They appear, as quoted earlier,
directlybeforethebook’sturningpoint,themomentwhensheforthefirsttimemeetsthe
Norwegian woman Liv, signalizing an important step in her integration into Norwegian
society.Thetunnelmetaphorfromthisquoteappearsalreadyintheforeword,thoughwith
the addition there that her border crossing fromSomalia toNorwayopens into light and
freedom (7), summing up symbolic border-crossings from trauma to integration, from
violencetosecurity,fromvoicelessnesstowriting,fromcaptivitytoliberty.
Asthereadercrossesoverintothemainnarrativeofthenovel,sheorheispresentedwith
a striking image of Amal’s aunts’ house inMogadishu, roofless (the corrugated iron roof
havingbeenstolentwoweeksearlier).Theparagraphislinkedformallytothatinthemiddle
ofthebookthroughtheircommonuseofaday-nightschemeinoneoftheirphrases.The
phrasefromthemiddleofthebook,”Isleepalotduringthedayandoftenendupinfights
atnight”(92),standshoweverinnegativecontrasttolifewiththeaunts:
11
11
Duringthedaythesunfries,nowit iseveningandcool.ThewomenandIsitclose
togetheronthefloorwithablanketaroundus. It is fullmoon,andthesky isclear
andfullofstars.Thewomentellmestoriesaboutthestarsweseeinskyabovethe
house. I listen closely, it is exciting to here thewomen tell. The storiesmakeme
forgetadailylifefullofwar.(11)
Foramoment(beforethehorrorofthenextpagewhenherauntsarekilledbymarauding
soldiers),wearepresentedwithanidyllicborderfigurereminiscentofpsychoanalystBracha
Lichtenberg-Ettingersconceptofthe”matrixialborderlines”(1994).Theaunts’house,with
its openness to the sky and the close bodily contact between its inhabitants, provides a
formalmemoryofapre-natalspaceof”borderlinks”ratherthanthepatriarchalbordercut
oftheOedipalphase(Lichtenberg-Ettinger1994,40-49).Underlyingtheaunts’storiesofthe
stars is the direct communication of the stars through the roof, again reminiscent of a
unordered and subtle ”semiotic” and not a structured ”symbolic” language, to cite the
termsusedby JuliaKristevaabout the relationshipof literature to suchapre-natal space
(1990). Inthisspace,narrative isnotanegotiationwiththeNorwegianpublicsphereora
reminderofviolence,butachildhoodmemoryofSomalioral literature.Aden’sbookfinds
itswaybacktoanoriginarysceneofstory-tellingwhichprovidesborderfigureswhichstand
incontrast to the lawofviolentborder-crossingwhich is themainmotifofherbook.The
spatial configuration constituted by a house without a roof in itself signifies a specific
conceptionoftheborder,atoposinwhichtheborderisreplacablebyanopenspace,and
thelackofprotectionwhichistheresultofaborderbeinglostcantemporarilyopenuptoa
sublimeandrelationalspace.
Aden’s protagonist continually meets specific configurations of space which define her
senseofborders.Moreoftenthannot,suchas intheherfirstvisittothechildprotection
agency,herspaceisthreatenedbypenetrationandoccupationbyothers.Thecultureshock
and accompanying potential for misunderstanding is expressed in the scene where she
throwsatelevision–anobjectwhichshedoesnotunderstand–outofthewindowofthe
room the agency has provided her with in Oslo (41). Increasingly through the book she
experiences social exclusion from the Somali diaspora community and inclusion fromher
Norwegianfriends.Mostimportantlyhowever,thebookfiguresherlifeinOsloasaliminal
12
12
periodwhichonly reproduces the threateningviolenceofher lifeasachild solderon the
outskirtsofMogadishu.OslobecomesaplaceamixingbetweenNorwayandSomalia,asa
lifeofdrugsandcrimecreatesfortheprotagonistawar-likesituationinapeacefulcountry.
Continually, narrative agents who appear to be her helpers transform into antagonists,
symbolic border guards: this applies to members of her family, her friend Mustafa in
SomaliaandherhusbandYassininNorway,aswellastothechildprotectionagency.
The physical border-crossings between Somali and Norwegian territories take place in
aeroplanes.TheoriginarymigrationtoNorwaytakesplaceundertheinfluenceofsedatives
providedbyherSomaliguide,andthesenseofborderdisorientationsheexperienceshere
spreads through thebook,only tobe counteredas shegradually gains in confidenceand
competenceaftertheplot’sturningpoint.
Turning to Ahmed’s novel Forberedelsen, the image of the roof open to the stars which
connectsAden’sprotagonisttoanoriginalsecurity isreplacedbyamorematerial formof
“umbilical object”, a border concept described by Debra Castillo in the context of
immigration to theUnitedStates (2007). ”Umbilicalobjects” areobjectsbrought toone’s
newcountry inordertoremindoneselfofhome; intheirnewcontextstheyparadoxically
function both as connecting lines tying the migrant to the motherland and as border
markers(Castillo2007,124-125).TheumbilicalobjectinAhmed’snovelisanenvelopefull
of photographs from a prosperous past in Hargeisa, dating back to 1920, which her
protagonistZarafindsinhergrandmother’shouseinLondon.2Theseformtheentranceinto
themainnarrativeofthebook,whichthengoesback intimeandrecountsthestoryhow
shecomestobealoneinhergrandmother’shouseanddecidestoescapeontheEurostar
traintoParis,whichishowthebookends.Thephotographs,mentionedatbothouteredges
of the main narrative (Ahmed 2008, 9, 165), frame the story in an ambivalent fashion,
bringing together a longing for lost origins with an escape from a diasporic community
which is caught in traditions Zara cannot live with. They create a figure of border
2Thiskindofphotographicborderscapeisatypicaltoposinmigrationliterature,andcanbecomparedtothesonicandculinaryborderscapeswhichstructureothermigrationnovelsandwhicharedevelopedoninJopiNyman’sandStephenWolfe’scontributionstoEUBORDERSCAPESWorkingPackage10ResearchTask3.
13
13
contradictioninthediasporicexperienceforayoungwomenconceivedinAfricabutbornin
Europe(18).
Before themain narrative, Ahmed however gives a short fable as an introduction to the
book(7-8),pointingbothtothetraditionsofSomalioralliteratureandtothemagicalrealist
tradition in postcolonial literature. The fable recounts the story of an exiled slavewho is
enchantedintoamermaid,butwhoendsupestablishinganewcountry,whichwillonlybe
forexiles.Italsofiguresasailor,whoismetaphoricallydescribedasajellyfishonland.AsI
havealreadyindicated,Ahmed’snovel isrich inmetaphor,andinparticular imagesofthe
borderbetweenlandandsea,ofmonstruoustransformationsinkeepingwithhernarrative
ofcomingtoage.Intermsofborderconcepts,herfiguresproducespatialimagesofcultural
hybridity and of being caught on the border between cultures. These images progress
however, in a move similar to that in Ingeborg Bachmann’s poem on cold war Central
European spaces “Böhmen liegt am Meer” (1978, “Bohemia Lies by the Sea”), to the
creationofanimaginarynationofexilesinautopianmaritimespace.
Honour
NasimKarim’sautobiographicalnovelIZZAT-Forærensskyld(1996,”IZZAT–Forthesakeof
honour”) and Romeo Gill’s first two parts of a projected trilogy, Harjeet: Roman (2008,
”Harjeet:Novel”)andUngmanninyttland:Roman(2011,”YoungManinNewLand”)both
involvebordercrossingsbetweentheSub-Continent(PakistanandIndia)andNorway.They
alsoexhibitcertainsimilaritiesintheme,mostclearlyaninter-generationalconflictinvolving
proudfatherswithastrongsenseofhonourorizzatperceivedasbeingpartofPakistaniand
Northern Indian culture. This theme is lacking in the two Somali diaspora narratives
discussedabove,but incommonwith these isanemanicipationplot involvingescapes. In
Karim’snovel,theprotagonistNoreenmakesadramaticescapeafteranarrangedmarriage
which takes place during a visit to Pakistan, receiving police protection on her return to
Norway.InGill’snovels,thesonAkas(orsohisbrotherspeculates)becomesthefirstIndian
in Norway to move out from his family against their will, again under the threat of an
arrangedmarriage,movinginwithhisNorwegiangirlfriend.Theborder-crossingsinKarim’s
andGill’snovelsare temporal transitionswithincoming-of-agenarratives,epistemological
14
14
crossings as the protagonists discover their own fathers and explore the reasons behind
theirmotivations, and topographical crossings centred around plane flights. Both involve
travelstocountriesoforiginwhichtakeonthestatusofnon-ritualliminalspaces.
However, where IZZAT focuses on the trauma of abuse, anorexia, suicide attempts and
emprisonment, Harjeet and Ung mann i nytt land (as the latter makes clear) are more
concerned with coming-to-literature; we imagine that the third, projected book of the
trilogymighttaketheformofaKünstlerroman.Otherintersectionalaspectsareinvolvedin
these differences, mainly to do with gender and religion (Noreen is the daughter in a
Muslimfamily,AkasisthesoninaSikhfamily).
Inordertoclarifytherolesofthesetwonarrativesinrelationtothepublicsphere,itis–as
inthecaseofAden’sandAhmed’sbooks–necessarytotakeintoaccountquestionsofstyle.
Theauthors’narratologicaldecisionsaffectthewayinwhichthesebooksfunctionaspublic
representations;inJacquesRancière’sterms,thewayinwhichpoliticsandaestheticsmeet
inthe“distributionofthesensible”(2004).BothKarimandGillavoidovertmetaphorsand
magicalrealism,preferringamoretraditionalrealismwithstrongethnographiccomponents
givingcross-culturalexplanations.Karim’sshortnovelisargumentative,endingwithashort
polemical afterword, while Gill’s more epic style reaching back the experience of Akas’
father emigrating from India to Norway as a guest worker in the 1970s has a strong
historiographical element. Karim choses a conventional first person, retrospective style
correspondingtoanactofautobiographicalwitnessing,whileGill’s lengthydescriptions in
thethirdpersonprovideforliterarydefamiliarization.Gillconstantlydelegatesfocalization
to others than the protagonist, allowing the reader to cross the generation and gender
divides involved inhisnovels.Whilewriting in the thirdperson,alsoaboutAkas, the first
sentenceofHarjeetmakesclear that thenarrator isactuallyAkashimself: “Hewrites the
storyashebelievesitmusthavebeen:[…]”(9).Gillthusasksustoreadthenovelsasanact
of narrative identification and imagination across generations on the part of Akas,
underliningtheepistemologicalborder-crossingbetweentimes,generationsandcultures.
The aesthetic dimension partly defines the way in which these texts construct border
conceptswiththehelpofborderfiguresandborderconfigurations.Theprosaicstyleused
15
15
by both Karim and Gill avoid metaphors for the most part, but Karim uses some both
powerfulandconventionalmetaphors inordertodescribestatesofculturalhybridityand
incommensurability, describing the children of Asian parents in Norway as “Europe’s
niggers”and“Asia’swhitepopulation”(5)andasfeeling“halfNorwegianandhalfPakistani”
or as “split” between countries, languages and cultures (25), and talking of a “collision”
betweenthenorms(105)ofadaughterandafatherwhoare“lightyearsapart”(115).The
resultoftheseviolentdividesisthatherprotagonistNoreenbecomesaformofzombie,a
hybrid, uncanny, both dead and alive figure of the border. At her arranged wedding in
Pakistan, she is a “corpse who is brought in by her father” (118) and when signing the
marriagepapers,shefeelsthatshehas“signedherdeathcertificate”;andafterherescape
toNorwaywiththehelpoftheNorwegianambassadortoPakistan,hermotherisforcedto
treatheras“declareddead”(137).
Themost strikingmetaphors or symbols of borders in Gill’s books aremore ambivalent.
Akasisrepeatedlyattractedawayfromthehorizontalactofcrossingthebordertoavertical
axis,eitherupintotheairordownintowater.AsachildinHarjeet,hisbrotherallowshim
toflyakite,presagingthe journeybyairtoNorway:“AndwhileAkassteeredthekite,he
day-dreamed.He flewhigh up among the birds and clouds and thought that itwould be
wonderfultobeabletoflytoschool, […]”(18).Afterhis fatherhasmovedtoNorway,he
attempts to imaginethetallhouses thereandknowsthathe“hadactuallyneverbeenso
highupintotheairatanypoint”(160).InPunjab,hehasneverseenthesea,andimagines
the danger of drowning (163), and then, again crossing an epistemological border to
Norway,“wonderswhether itwaspossible toswim in thesea inNorway, for if itwas,he
would learn to swim” (164). The day his father comes home to visit from Norway, he
imagines falling into awell and dying (192). This first book of the trilogy endswith Akas
flyingtogetherwithhisbrotherandmothertojoinhisfatherinNorway.Thesecondbook,
Ungmann i nytt land, beginswith the family travelling from the airport to their father’s
home inDrammen.Growingupthere,Akas learnstoswim(74),andaftermovingout,he
imagineshisfuture,beginningonthelastpageofthesecondbook,asarepeatedstrugglein
whichhesees“himselfbeingthrownagainsttherockspointingupoutofthesea,againand
againhesawhisbodybeingthrownagainsttherocks.Thiswillbeastruggleagainstthetide
andthewaves,hethought,butthisstrugglewillbemystruggle”(313).Onthisouteredge
16
16
ofthebook,heseeshimselfas“ayoungmaninnewcountry”,quotingthetitleofthebook
andalsotheNorwegiantitle(Ungmannsland,“Youngman’scountry”)ofthedebutnovel
When the Lion Feeds (1964) by bestseller author Wilbur Smith. He then opens the first
Norwegiannovelwhichhewillread,KnutHamsun’sAugust(1930),thestoryofamanwho
returnshomewithgreatambitionsafteralongstayoutsideofNorway.
Harjeet,Akas’ father, is often absent; he carries theborderwithinhim.Before leaving to
work ina factory inNorway,hehadworkedasabordersoldier inKashmir.His formative
memoryandtraumawastheviolentexileonDivision,ashewas5yearsoldandhadtoflee
withhis family fromwhathadbecomePakistan (64-67).Hebecomesa figurewhomAkas
cannot trust, but Aka’s day-dreams and imagination before becoming (we imagine) an
authorarepredicatedontheabsences,freemovementabovebordersandimaginedplaces
hisfatherrepresents.
BothKarim’sandGill’snarrativesdescribeextendedtopographicalborder-crossingsandthe
borderscapesthatthesearticulate.WhereasKarim’sbookfiguresthetopographical,cultural
andgenerationalborderasasplit,Gill’sbooksfocusmoreofagradualprogressiontowards
independenceinwhichdifferences,commonalitiesanddefamiliarizinggazesinthepassage
betweenIndiaandNorwayareemphasized.OnthefirstpageofUngmanninyttland,the
smellofnew-mewnhayinNorway,similartosmellsherecallsfromIndia,remindsAkasthat
heisonthesameplanet(9);butonlyalittlelater,impressedbytheperceivedqualitiesof
theNorwegianenvironment,hefindsheisinfactonanotherplanet(20).Gill’sbooks,with
theirhistoricalperspective,repeatedlyutilizethetoposoftheunique,thelast,thefirst,and
thenew:inHarjeet,thelastsummerthefamilycelebratestherainstogether(113),Harjeet
being the first immigrant tomove inatÅssiden,apartofDrammen inNorway (171), the
firstwhitemanAkassees,at theairportonthewaytoNorway(249); towardstheendof
Ung mann i nytt Land, Akas is compared by his brother Suraj with record-breaking
adventurers,remindingthereaderofAkas’imaginationsofverticalmovement:“Akasmust
bethefirst,hethought.SomebodyhadbeenthefirstonMountEverest,anotherhadbeen
thefirsttoflyacrosstheAtlantic,AkaswasthefirstIndianinNorwaytomovefromhome
againstthewillofhisfamily”(300).
17
17
Comingofage
Thecorpusexaminedhereof inall6modern immigrantbook-length(ortwo-book length)
narratives of border-crossing published in Norwegian is – in keeping with its second
generationandgeneration1,5perspective–hasthecoming-of-agenarrative,thetemporal
border crossing from childhood to adulthood, in common. All are novels which invite
ethnographic and/or political readings through their documentary and testimonial
elements:Gill’s andAhmed’snovelsare realistnovelsbasedon theauthors’experiences;
Maria Amelie’s pseudonymous Ulovlig norsk (2010, ”Illegally Norwegian”) is like Aden’s
book a partly fictionalized autobiographical narrative, and contains lengthy excerpts from
herblog.
year genre diaspora migrate borders class landscape
Karim 1996 novel Pakistani work visit privil. urban
Gill1 2008 novel Sikh work originaryrevisit
non-priv. differ.
Ahmed 2008 novel Somali politics originarytransdias privil. idyll
Aden 2009 testim. Somali war originaryrevisits
non-priv. gothic
Amelie 2010 testim. Caucasus illegal originary privil. idyll
Gill2 2011 novel Sikh family originaryrevisit
non-priv.
realsymbolic
The forms of migration involved are various: reference is made to historical phases of
migration (Pakistani immigration in the 1970s and Somali immigration in the 1990s and
2000s);someofthebooksdealwithworkmigrationwitherbytheirprotagonistsorbytheir
parents,somespecificallywithdifferentformsofrefugees(Amalisachildsoldierrefugee,
Marie’s familyarepolitical refugees,whileSara is the first refugeegrantedasylumonthe
basisoffaith–asaconverttoChristianity,shehasbeenpersecutedforapostacy).Thereis
an equal balance between migrants coming from privileged backgrounds and migrants
coming from poorer backgrounds. All except one (Amelie’s book) are stories of legal
migrants and their children. Somedescribeoriginalborder-crossings fromother countries
18
18
either by parents or children with visits or revisits to countries of origin; one (Ahmed)
describesatransdiasporicvisit.
One key to an understanding of changing border concepts in this corpus seems to be
historicalchangesinmobilities,withcheaperairtravelallowingformorefrequentjourneys
back and forth across borders. These are all narratives which challenge the monolithic
stereotypeofmigration,inwhichborder-crossingisrelegatedtoanpast,originarymoment.
Another key is the identify of the oppressions and conflicts involved in these stories, the
cause inashiftofnarrativeopponents. Ifpreviouslyoppressionwasexternal,takingplace
withinapostcolonialorneocolonialframework,andemphasizingeverydayracism,nowthe
narrativearemorecomplex,withborders internalized todiasporasand to families.These
forms of oppression are regulated by the polarities of honour and trangression, by
modernization processes, and by gender and the body. Increasingly Norwegians become
ambivalent,oftentakingontheroleofnarrativehelpersinrelationtosecondgenerationor
generation1,5migrants.
Broadlyspeaking,theborderfiguresandborderconfigurationsproducedinthesenarratives
canbesortedintotwodifferentdiscourses,oneofculturalidentitiesanddifferenceandone
ofpersonalidentitiesanddevelopment(Bildung).Thesecometogetherinmigrantliterature
whennarrativesofthetransformationofidentityareembeddedintheextendedmigration
borderscape(Nyman2015).Inthediscourseofculturalidentitiesanddifference,thecorpus
producedimagesofanextendedborder-crossingordisseminatedborder,ofadisorienting
in-between,ofthealienationsanddefamiliarizationsofculturaldifference,ofthedivisions
andclashesofculturalhybridityandambiguity,ofacoastalsurfsignifyingborderidentities,
and of oxymoronic paradoxes (e.g. the title of Amelie’s book, ”IllegallyNorwegian”). This
discourse is one already well-established in the theoretical conceptualizations of
postcolonial theory, while the discourse of personal identity complicates this somewhat.
Here we find the liminal states of coming-of-age, a focus on bodily borders, topoi of
captivity, escape and protection, the figure of flying, an imagined utopian homeland for
exileswhichmayfunctionas”transcommunity”ofliteratureandbeconnectedtooriginary
idylls,andinextentionofthatplotsofcrossingtheborderintowriting.
19
19
Comingtowriting
The corpus examined here is made up of texts which are to a lesser or greater degree
performances,eitherstagedperformancesofperformativityoractualperformativeactions
inthepublicsphere.Writingandvariousaspectsofwriting–accesstowriting,becominga
writer, access tooriginary andNorwegian literary cultures– takesonamajor role in this
performativity. I have alreadydescribedhowelementsof especiallyAden’s,Ahmed’s and
Gill’sbookpointtothesymboliccrossingintowritingasbeingpartoftheextendedSomali-
Norwegian,Somali-transdiasporicorIndian-Norwegianborder-crossings.Theexcerptsfrom
Rasmussen’s writer’s notebooks in her Skyggeferden make clear that it is the story of a
writerwhoonedaywillwritethenovelthereaderisnowreading.ButitisMariaAmelie’s
pseudonymously-publishedUlovlignorsk,likeAden’sMindrømomfrihetanautobiography
whichborrowstechniquesfrommoreliterarygenresforthesakeofanonymity,whichisthe
mostclearlyperformativepieceofwritinginthecorpus.
TheplotlineofAmelie’sbookcanbe reconstructedchronologicallyasaaBildungsroman-
likejourneyleadingfromachildhoodintheCaucasustothewritingofthebookitselfinthe
yearbefore itspublication in2010, leavinganellipsisat theend inwhich the readers–a
significant part of the Norwegian public, judging by its sales figures – must reconstruct
events (the author’s subsequent arrest anddeportation, followedbyher readmittance to
Norway) through reference tomedia reports.Amelie’s family arrives as refugees froman
anonymizedcountryintheCaucasusinMoscowin1997andseekasyluminFinlandin2000
and thenafter rejectionof theirapplication inFinland, inNorway in2002.After renewed
rejectionofanapplicationforasylumstatusinNorway,thefamilychosestogointohiding
as illegal immigrants, where they are caught between despondency and sucessful
integration into local Norwegian society, whichMaria records in her diary. An imperfect
bureaucracyallowsMariatostudyattheNorwegianUniversityofScienceandTechnology
(NTNU) inTrondheimandtotakeadegree insocialanthropology,keepingananonymous
blogwhichisreproducedinthebook.Encouragedbyacorrespondencewiththeacclaimed
socialanthropologistThomasHyllandEriksenattheUniversityofOslo,shewritesabook–
thebook the reader is reading – detailing her life as an illegal immigrant inNorway. The
book and the blog combine to make Maria Amelie into a cause célèbre in Norway.
Campaigns are launched to grant her asylum status in Norway, and after the book is
20
20
launchedbothnamedNorwegianoftheyearandarrestedatapublicspeakingengagement
attheNansenSchoolinLillehammer,tobedeportedtoRussia.Aminorchangeinthelaw,
knownas“LexAmelie”,enableshertoapplyforastaypermitinNorwayandtakeupajob
as a journalist. The book may thus be read as part of an application for Norwegian
residence,butalsopartoftheprocessofbecomingNorwegian,crossingtheculturalborder.
ThebordertowritingbecomesthebordertoNorway.
While written more as a testimonial than as a literary text, the book actively uses
metaphors,forexamplesupportingitsperformativityintheshortprologuewiththehelpof
strong,metaphoricoppositionsinadirectaddresstothereader:“AfterreadingthisbookI
wantyoutoliftyourgazeandseetheworldinanotherway.Iwantyoutoseeperspectives,
not details. I want you to see the sunset on the horison and not the screen of your
computer”(11).Thebookbegins,inthetextualborder-crossingintothetext,withadirect
stagingofthetextualborderbetweentextandreader,framedinametaphorical language
focusingonepistemologicalplacesofbordering.
Early on in the book the illegal crossing into Norway from Finland, by way of the less
populatedroutethroughtheNorthofFinlandtoKilpisjärviandthentoTromsø,isdescribed
indetail(16-17).Thistakesplaceinacarwhichisthreateningtobreakdown,atnightinthe
snowywinterdarkness.Thetextcarefullydelineatesalackofdifferentiationandofborders
in Finland: “Weareapproaching theborder toNorway. Thewhite snowmergeswith the
sky,naturelooksemptyandlifeless”(16).As inmanyborder-crossingscenes,thecrossing
becomes a place of reflection, opening up a liminal space in the textwhereAmelie goes
through the motivations of her parents in want to make this journey (17). The border-
crossing itself, again typically, is displaced and disseminated across space and time. On
driving through the border post the narrator exclaims: “We drive through! We are in
Norway!Andasifneedsomethingtomakeusbelievethis,asignappears:’Norway’.[…]We
driveformanykilometreswithoutmeetingasinglecar,justwinterdarkness.Wearereally
inNorway!”(17).3Then,instrongcontrasttothe“desertedwaste”(16)inFinlandandalso,
3Theborderpostispresumablythepolicedcustomspostsomedistanceawayfromtheactualborder,insideFinland,soinfacttheyarenotinNorwayoncetheyhavegonethroughtheborderpost.However,themarked
21
21
as it becomes apparent, toMoscow,Norwaybecome the subject of the sublime and the
domesticatonce:
Istareoutofthewindowinastonishment.Naturehaschangedsoquickly,nowitis
earthshakingly beautiful. Mountains, mountains, mountains, mountains, tall
mountains!JustlikeathomeintheCaucasus!Iturnaroundrestlesslyinthecar,look
upanddownandleftandrightandoutthroughthebackwindow.AtlastIcansee
mountains again, themountainswhichhavebeenpartofmy life frombirth. They
didn’t have anything like this in Moscow. And not in Finland either. Magical
[eventyrlige],majesticalmountains!(17)
In a form of matrixial borderlinking, the Norwegian mountains function as a pseudo-
umbilical cord to Amelie’s birthplace and original home. As is often the case in border
crossings,anelementofthefantastic is introduced–themountainsarenotonlysublime,
but“[e]ventyrlige”(“magical”,ormoredirectlytranslated,“fairy-tale-like”).
The word eventyrlig is also used in foreword to the book (entitled “To the reader”, this
precedestheprologuementionedbefore)inawaywhichconnectsittotheoxymoron(and
borderfigure)ofthetitleUlovlignorsk. ItsignifiestheambivalenceofAmelie’sNorwegian
existence:“My lifeherehasbeenstrange,sad,butat thesametimemagical [eventyrlig]”
(8).MagicalNorwegianness,herefurtherspecifiedasconnectedtotheloveandfriendship
of thepeopleshemeets inNorway,comestogetherwithsad illegality,hereconnectedto
the brutality of the law. The ambivalence is in itself “strange [merkelig]”, partaking in an
uncanninessoftheborder.
Theeventyrligeormagicalishoweveralsoconnectedwiththegenreoftheeventyr(“fairy-
tale”),andinthedescriptionoftheborder-crossingintoNorway,withtheactivityofstory-
telling and specifically of telling stories to children, that is to say in anoriginary sceneof
narration. In terms of the border figures involved, the image of the Norwegian – or
Caucasian – mountains on the border in Amalie’s Ulovlig norsk, with their sublime
andsignedborderisfollowedatashortdistanceintoNorwaybyasimpleroadsignsaying“Norge”(“Norway”).
22
22
verticality,canbereadascorrespondingtothescenediscussedearlierofstory-tellingunder
thestarsinarooflesshouseinMogadishuinAden’sMindrømomfrihet.
AcknowledgementsI would like to thank listeners at various conferences and symposia for their questions, not least members of the Border Poetics/Border Culture group in Tromsø who discussed an earlier draft.
References
Aden,Amal.2009.Mindrømomfrihet:Enselvbiografiskfortelling.Oslo:Aschehoug.
Aden,Amal.2011.Detskalmerkesatdegråter:OmlikestillingblantsomaliereiNorge.Oslo:
Aschehoug.
Ahmed,Roda.2008.Forberedelsen:Roman.[Oslo]:Gyldendal.
Amelie,Maria.2010.Ulovlignorsk.Oslo:Pax.
Bachmann, Ingeborg. 1978. “Böhmen liegt am Meer”. In Sämtliche Gedichte, 177-178.
München:Piper.
Brambilla, Chiara. 2015. “Exploring the Critical Potential of the Borderscapes Concept”
Geopolitics20(1):14-34.doi:10.1080/14650045.2014.884561.
Castillo,DebraA.2007.“Borders,Identities,Objects”InBorderPoeticsDe-limited,editedby
JohanSchimanskiandStephenWolfe,115-148.Hannover:Wehrhahn.
Danielsen, Kirsten, ed. 2005. Neste stopp Nordpolen: Nye nordmenn - egne stemmer.
Stamsund:Orkana.
Eskild,Hilde.2010.Kaffe,karamellogvaniljesaus:Dokumentarbok.[Trollåsen]:Ganesa.
Fuentes,Carlos. 1996.La fronterade cristal:Unanovelaennueve cuentos.México,D. F.:
Alfaguara.
Fuentes,Carlos.1999.TheCrystalFrontier.London:Bloomsbury.
Gill,Romeo.2008.Harjeet:Roman.Oslo:Oktober.
23
23
Gill,Romeo.2011.Ungmanninyttland:Roman.Oslo:Oktober.
Johansen,LivBjørnhaug,andIdaTolgensbakkVedeld,eds.2008.Mangfoldigeminner:Veier
tilNorge.Oslo:Norskfolkeminnelag.
Karim,Nasim.1996.IZZAT-Forærensskyld.Oslo:J.W.CappelensForlag.
Kristeva, Julia. 1990. “Det semiotiska och det symboliska”. In Stabat Mater, 113-164.
Stockholm:NaturochKultur.
Kumar, Loveleen, ed. 1997. Mulighetenes barn: Å vokse opp med to kulturer. [Oslo]:
Cappelen.
Lichtenberg-Ettinger,Bracha. 1994. “TheBecomingThresholdofMatrixialBorderlines”. In
Travellers’Tales:NarrativesofHomeandDisplacement,editedbyGeorgeRobertson,38-62.
London:Routledge.
Moretti,Franco.1998.AtlasoftheEuropeanNovel1800-1900.London:Verso.
Nyman,Jopi.2015.“BordersandTransitiveIdentitiesinJamalMahjoub’s‘LastThoughtson
theMedusa’”. InBorderscaping: Imaginations and Practices of BorderMaking, edited by
Chiara Brambilla, Jussi Laine, James W. Scott and Gianluca Bocchi, 229-236. Aldershot:
Ashgate.
Rajaram,PremKumar,andCarlGrundy-Warr.2007.“Introduction”.InBorderscapes:Hidden
Geographies and Politics at Territory’s Edge, edited by Prem Kumar Rajaram and Carl
Grundy-Warr,ix-xl.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.
Rancière, Jacques. 2004. The Politics of Aesthetics: The Distribution of the Sensible.
TranslatedbyGabrielRockhill.London:Continuum.
Rasmussen,SaraAzmeh.2012.Skyggeferden.Oslo:Humanist.
Roy,Arundhati.1997.TheGodofSmallThings.London:Flamingo.
Schimanski, Johan.2006. “CrossingandReading:Notes towardsaTheoryandaMethod.”
Nordlit(19):41-63.
24
24
Schimanski, Johan. 2015. “Border Aesthetics and Cultural Distancing in the Norwegian-
RussianBorderscape”.Geopolitics20(1):35-55.doi:10.1080/14650045.2014.884562.